M$ Takes Two Hits in Second Quarter of 2012

While shipments of PCs were flat in 2Q, they were down 5.7% in USA from last year according to Gartner. M$ makes a huge percentage of its revenue in USA, 55%.

Also, M$ had the write-off for an advertising acquisition that bore no fruit…“As a result of its 2012 impairment review, Microsoft has determined that a write down of its Online Services Division goodwill of approximately $6.2 billion is required.”

Together, M$’s 10-Q expected next week will make interesting reading. One wonders if the dip will be enough for shareholders to demand change…

If average selling prices are lower elsewhere, the drop in sales in USA could be worth a lot of money. While people are busily buying small cheap computers, the monopoly teeters.

Share this:

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.

12 Responses to M$ Takes Two Hits in Second Quarter of 2012

JR really most of the ratios Clarence Moon quotes were correct 3 to 6 years ago. Its more of a case Clarence Moon has not kept up with current day ratios and is basically living in the past.

Like the 1-7 for iphone was true 3 years ago. Lot has changed in 3 years.

Statements also prove this “Linux has only taken over the low-end, non-critical part of the server spectrum, such as web servers.” 6 years ago party true current day false. Linux in the last 3-5 has taken a lot of critical and high end server market.

JR the Clarence Moon is a out of date troll. Since its not that advantage being current.

Current changes are highly destructive to the Status Quo. Some of the question is when the larger crunches well happen.

Computer stores vs Supermarkets is going to be one of the more interesting problems coming in places like the USA.

Clarence Moon basically would not annoy either of us as much if Clarence Moon spent some time doing some homework to get information quoting up to date.

Clarence Moon
“Dumbo. Unix is some 3 times larger in servers than Linux. Linux has only taken over the low-end, non-critical part of the server spectrum, such as web servers.”
I think you have your numbers backwards. $750 million is Linux for 2012 first quater. Unix is $542.4 million, z/OS is $201.9 million

Now Unix + z/OS equals Linux. Both of those are being replaced by Linux the upstart.

Also for processing power Unix machines are normally more expensive than Linux machines for the same power.

In profit extracted from Unit counts Unix is larger than Linux.

Ok Microsoft is 1.6 billion. But when you allow for the licensing cost of Microsoft that is basically 1 to 1. That is only 800 million of hardware. So windows is only 50 million ahead of Linux in hardware and behind Unix/Linux as a joint.

Really Clarence Moon 3 to 1 I don’t think has been true for the last 5 years I could be wrong. But just do me a favour on this get up to date. Linux has kicked Unix but is still kicking Unix but. OS/z is also on that but kicking list.

Introduction of ARM in the server room also undermines the Unix market. None of the existing Unix OS’s run on ARM. Arm is a cheaper RISC style chip with simpler performance to other RISC chips but with one big advantage. ARM supports running Java without a JIT. Yes the processor core can read and run java byte code in the new 64 bit version.

Clarence Moon so those arm chips that are powering android are also powering Linux into the server room to possible final victory against Unix. Linux big disadvantage against Unix was that the Unix systems run on there makers own RISC chips and those makers kept back some instructions just for there own OS’s.

Yes the IBM PowerPC chip and others have features that are only for there version of UNIX.

Clarence Moon wrote more nonsense, “Unix is some 3 times larger in servers than Linux. Linux has only taken over the low-end, non-critical part of the server spectrum, such as web servers.”

There’s nothing non-critical about databases and web-servers at Facebook and Google.

Then there’s NYSE and LSE, US military, French National Police, etc.“A segment of IT leaders still hold the view that Linux is neither prolific in their data centers nor does it run mission critical applications.

This perspective seems at odds with reality, considering that as far back as 2004 research firms were reporting the role of Linux in mission critical application environments. Forrester research then showed that “fifty-three percent of the 140 corporate executives surveyed run mission-critical applications on Linux, and 52% choose Linux for new apps.”, from their Linux Crosses Into Mission-Critical Apps”
see Underestimating the Mission Critical Role of Linux

Ever since IBM invested heavily in GNU/Linux the idea that GNU/Linux is not ready for mission-critical roles died rather swiftly.

A recent report by IDC for EMEA showed “By operating system, Windows held 52.0% of the market, generating hardware spending of around $1.6 billion, down 0.6% year on year. Linux was the only operating system to experience positive growth year on year, up 6.5% at $750 million, or around 20.7% of total market sales. 1Q12 was the second time that Linux overtook Unix in market share since records began. The first time this happened was in 3Q11. Unix declined 27.6% on the back of weaker RISC system sales, with sales of $542.4 million. Of the main operating systems, only z/OS declined faster that Unix, by 39.3% to reach $201.9 million.”

There’s nothing there to suggest GNU/Linux is not eating UNIX’s lunch. That’s not surprising since GNU/Linux is very similar to a UNIX OS and applications are easily portable. Combine that with the high cost of hardware on which UNIX runs…

Clarence Moon and kozmcrae Shareholder rebellion have a required cause.

It happens when the share holders see that different management will make there shares pay more.

Problem I have is Microsoft is a sinking ship. Ok not a fast sinking ship but there is nothing much different management can do about it.

The old MS rule was 10 percent of the hardware price could be software. You look at there server market they are currently running 1 to 1 or worse. So this is not long term stable. Microsoft wants to enter the ARM market. There are sub 100 dollar devices.

Same problem today as CP/M on x86 machines. CP/M was too expensive so a crappy clone got used. Windows is too expensive so Android will be used in current market. Problem is with a massive number of users that crappy mirror product will get better than what its a crappy mirror product of.

Sun Micro-systems tried to fight the tide of Open Source. Every method they tried failed. We have no reason to believe MS is save-able. The question is how fast does the PC market reduce and what will be its final size. I would not be surprised if current Microsoft market does not reduce to 1/2 to 1/4 of current size. This is what kinda happened to Unix as it was displaced by Linux in the server market.

Disgruntled shareholders simply sell their stock, Mr. Pogson. They do not try to change the company.

I might note that people who have a problem with a computer application simply choose another as well. They do not take it upon themselves to fix the problem by digging into the source code. You do not seem to realize that either.

My Mission

My observations and opinions about IT are based on 40 years of use in science and technology and lately, in education. I like IT that is fast, cost-effective and reliable. I do not care whether my solution is the same as yours. I like to think for myself.

My first use of GNU/Linux in 2001 was so remarkably better than what I had been using, I feel it is important work to share GNU/Linux with the world. I have been blessed by working in schools where students and school systems have benefited by good, modular software easily installed in most systems.

I have shown GNU/Linux to thousands of students and hundreds of teachers over the years and will continue in some way doing that until I die in spite of the opposition.